Territorial features, disorder and fear of crime in residential neighbourhoods in Malaysia: testing for multigroup invariance

Abstract

This research examined the relationships between territoriality, disorder, crime, perceived risk and fear of crime and determined whether these relationships are constant between neighbourhoods. Questionnaire surveys and on-site observations were conducted on a sample of 320 residents from two neighbourhoods in Malaysia. Tests for invariance were conducted to determine whether coefficients differed across neighbourhoods. Confirmatory factor analytic models of the constructs exhibited adequate fit following multiple criteria within each and across samples. Results from these analyses suggested that the relationships between disorder and perceived risk, victimisation, and fear of crime were significant in both samples. Although high territoriality was associated with low-crime experiences in the low-crime area, no significant relationship was observed in the high-crime area. The findings illustrated the importance of examining territoriality and perceptions of disorder within the neighbourhood contexts.

Keywords:

• disorder
• victimisation
• fear of crime
• territorial signs
• multigroup

Notes

1. Hale, “Fear of Crime.”

2. Abdullah et al., “Testing for Individual Factors.”

3. McCrea et al., “Fear of Crime in Brisbane.”

4. Skogan, “Impact of Victimization on Fear.”

5. van der Voordt AND van Wegen, “Testing Building Plans.”

6. Newman, Defensible Space.

7. Cohen et al., “Broken Windows”; Perkins and Taylor, “Ecological Assessments of Community Disorder”; Wilson and Kelling, “Broken Windows.”

8. LaGrange et al., “Perceived Risk and Fear of Crime.”

9. Brown et al., “Incivilities, Place Attachment and Crime.”

10. Markowitz et al., “Extending Social Disorganization Theory”; McCrea et al., “Fear of Crime in Brisbane.”

11. Chang, “Social Crime or Spatial Crime”; Hedayati Marzbali et al., “Influence of Crime Prevention”; Minnery and Lim, “Measuring Crime Prevention.”

12. Foster and Giles-Corti, “Built Environment, Neighborhood Crime.”

13. Foster et al., “Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime”; Sampson et al., “Neighborhoods and Violent Crime”; Swatt et al., “Fear of Crime, Incivilities, and Collective Efficacy.”

14. Gibson et al., “Social Integration, Individual Perceptions.”

15. Swatt et al., “Fear of Crime, Incivilities, and Collective Efficacy.”

16. See note 6 above.

17. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Victimisation.”

18. Dunstan et al., “Assessment of Residential Environments.”

19. Perkins et al., “Participation and Social and Physical Environment.”

20. Foster et al., “Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime.”

21. Taylor et al., “Block Crime and Fear.”

22. Minnery and Lim, “Measuring Crime Prevention.”

23. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Fear of Crime.”

24. Hedayati Marzbali et al., “Influence of Crime Prevention.”

25. Greenberg et al., “Safety in Urban Neighborhoods.”

26. Brower et al, “Residents’ Perceptions of Territorial Features.”

27. Caughy et al., “Observational Measure for Urban Neighborhoods”; Dunstan et al., “Assessment of Residential Environments.”

28. Mesko et al., “Social-Demographic and Social-Psychological”; Rountree and Land, “Burglary Victimization, Crime Risk”; Tseloni and Zarafonitou, “Fear of Crime and Victimization”; Wilcox et al., “Built Environment and Community Crime.”

29. Baumer, “Fear of Crime in the United States”; DuBow et al., “Reactions to Crime”; Garofalo, “Victimization and Fear of Crime.”

30. Katz et al., “Fear of Gangs”; Minnery and Lim, “Measuring Crime Prevention”; Skogan and Maxfield, Coping with Crime.

31. Ferraro, Fear of Crime; Gray et al., “Reassessing the Fear of Crime.”

32. Taylor, “The Incivilities Thesis.”

33. Cohen et al., “Broken Windows”; Perkins et al., “Physical Environment of Street Crime”; Raudenbush and Sampson, “Ecometrics”; Wilson and Kelling, “Broken Windows.”

34. Skogan, Disorder and Decline.

35. Perkins and Taylor, “Ecological Assessments of Community Disorder.”

36. See note 8 above.

37. See note 26 above.

38. See note 17 above.

39. Wilson and Kelling, “Broken Windows.”

40. See note 23 above.

41. Hedayati Marzbali et al., “Using Hotspot Mapping.”

42. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Fear of Crime”; Brown and Altman, “Territoriality, Defensible Space”; Greenbaum and Greenbaum, “Territorial Personalization”; Hedayati Marzbali et al., “Influence of Crime Prevention.”

43. Franklin et al., “Multilevel Analysis of the Vulnerability.”

44. Callanan and Teasdale, “Exploration of Gender Differences”; Hedayati Marzbali et al., “Influence of Crime Prevention”; Rountree and Land, “Burglary Victimization, Crime Risk.”

45. Flatley et al., “Crime in England and Wales”; Foster et al., “Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime”; Franklin et al., “Multilevel Analysis of the Vulnerability”; Gibson et al., “Social Integration, Individual Perceptions.”

46. Flatley et al., “Crime in England and Wales.”

47. Austin et al., “Effects of Neighborhood Conditions.”

48. Harris and Brown, “Home and Identity Display.”

49. Byrne, “Testing for Multigroup Invariance.”

50. Schumacker and Lomax, Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling.

51. Hu and Bentler, “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes.”

52. Mardia, “Multivariate Skewness and Kurtosis.”

53. Fassinger, “Structural Equation Modeling.”

54. Bollen, Structural Equations with Latent Variables.

55. Preacher and Hayes, “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies”; Williams and MacKinnon, “Resampling and Distribution of Product Methods.”

56. Lockwood and MacKinnon, “Bootstrapping Standard Error.”

57. Sobel, “Asymptotic Confidence Intervals.”

58. Shrout and Bolger, “Mediation in Experimental and Nonexperimental Studies.”

59. Byrne, “Structural Equation Modeling with Amos.”

60. Sellin and Keeves, “Path Analysis with Latent Variables.”

61. See note 59 above.

62. Hair et al., Multivariate Data Analysis.

63. Cheung and Rensvold, “Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes.”

64. Byrne et al., “Testing for Equivalence of Factor Covariance.”

65. See note 59 above.

66. Byrne et al., “Testing for Equivalence of Factor Covariance”; Muthén and Christoffersson, “Simultaneous Factor Analysis.”

67. See note 59 above.

68. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Fear of Crime”; Brown and Bentley, “Residential Burglars Judge Risk”; Perkins et al., “Physical Environment of Street Crime.”

69. See note 23 above.

70. MacDonald and Gifford, “Territorial Cues and Defensible Space.”

71. Shaw and Gifford, “Resident”s and Burglars” Assessment.”

72. Brown, “Residential Territories.”

73. See note 25 above.

74. See note 23 above.

75. Milfont and Fischer, “Testing Measurement Invariance.”

76. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Fear of Crime”; Dunstan et al., “Assessment of Residential Environments”; Foster et al., “Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime.”

77. Caughy et al., “Observational Measure for Urban Neighborhoods.”

78. See note 3 above.

79. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Fear of Crime”; Brunton-Smith and Sturgis, “Do Neighborhoods Generate Fear of Crime”; Taylor, “The Incivilities Thesis.”

80. See note 35 above.

81. See note 25 above.

82. See note 18 above.

83. See note 23 above.

84. Newman, Defensible Space.

85. Abdullah et al., “Territorial Functioning and Fear of Crime”; Foster et al., “Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime.”

86. Pauwels and Pleysier, “Assessing Validity of Fear of Crime”; You et al., “Relations among Connectedness, and Bully Victimization.”

87. See note 75 above.

88. Cohen et al., “Broken Windows”; Raudenbush and Sampson, “Ecometrics.”

89. Foster et al., “Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime”; Mesko et al., “Social-Demographic and Social-Psychological”; Tseloni and Zarafonitou, “Fear of Crime and Victimization.”

90. Katz et al., “Fear of Gangs”; Skogan and Maxfield, Coping with Crime.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Institute of Postgraduate Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia [Grant Number 1001/CSL/870022].

Notes on contributors

Aldrin Abdullah

Aldrin Abdullah, Ph.D., is Associate Professor in the School of Housing, Building and Planning at Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). His main research interests are in crime prevention, landscape, urban design and environmental psychology. Currently, he is the Dean of the School of Housing, Building and Planning at USM. He is also a reviewer for a number of International indexed journals.

Massoomeh Hedayati Marzbali

Massoomeh Hedayati Marzbali, Ph.D., in landscape architecture, is a postdoctoral fellow at the School of Housing, Building and Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). Her main research interests are crime prevention, fear of crime, urban and landscape design and street pattern.

Mohammad Javad Maghsoodi Tilaki

Mohammad Javad Maghsoodi Tilaki, Ph.D., in urban planning, is Assistant Professor at the Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran. His main research interests are urban design, tourism and marketing, urban land use policies and urban land use planning.

Azizi Bahauddin

Azizi Bahauddin, Ph.D., in interior design, is Associate Professor at the School of Housing, Building & Planning, USM. His main research interests are cultural design, tourism and marketing and urban planning. Currently, he is the director of the Strategic Communications Office (SCOMM) at Universiti Sains Malaysia.